Military Personnel
Reporting Additional Servicemember Demographics Could Enhance Congressional Oversight Gao ID: GAO-05-952 September 22, 2005The high pace of military operations, thousands of casualties in ongoing military operations, and the services' recruiting challenges have raised questions about who is serving in today's military and concern that certain subgroups of the U.S. population may be disproportionately represented among those fighting and dying in support of the war on terrorism. These challenges and concerns have increased the need for information on the demographic characteristics of military personnel. GAO was asked to address three questions: (1) What are the demographic characteristics of servicemembers and how do they compare to the comparable U.S. civilian workforce? (2) How well are the services meeting their overall recruitment goals, and what influences whether or not individuals join the military? (3) What are the demographic characteristics of servicemembers who remained in the military in fiscal years 2000, 2002, and 2004? GAO was also asked to examine the demographic characteristics of servicemembers who died or were wounded in combat in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.
Since the institution of the All Volunteer Force in 1973, the military has become older and better educated, with increasing representation of racial and ethnic minorities, females, spouses, and parents. Today's force also differs from the U.S. civilian workforce in a number of important ways. For example, the military is younger than the civilian workforce. From a racial diversity perspective, the military, as of December 2004, had proportionately fewer Whites, partly because the military has proportionately more African Americans. Although Hispanic representation in the Active Component has markedly increased from 5 percent in 1993 to 9 percent in 2004, it is below the 11 percent for the U.S. civilian workforce. The representation of women in the military, at 16 percent, is below that of women in the U.S. workforce, at 48 percent, partly because of military policy and federal statutes. Although the 1997 government-wide requirements for the collection and reporting of information on race and ethnicity were to have been implemented by January 1, 2003, DOD has not yet fully implemented the requirements and its internal monthly reports continue to use some of the former racial/ethnic categories. This situation makes it difficult for Congress to monitor and directly compare the military and U.S. civilian racial and ethnic compositions. Over the past decade, the Active Component met its overall recruiting goals more frequently than has the Reserve Component. GAO found that a combination of personal, demographic, family, and societal factors, as well as the availability of economic and educational incentives, influence youths' decision to join or not to join the military. DOD reports that over half of today's youth are not qualified to serve because they cannot meet the military's entry standards for health, education, aptitude, or other requirements. DOD has not collected information on a recruit's socioeconomic status since 1999. Recent DOD research using recruits' zip codes as a proxy to indicate socioeconomic status and community population density found that the median income of recruits' communities is similar to that of other youth and that the majority of recruits come from rural and suburban areas. Without ongoing research on recruits' socioeconomic status and communities, DOD will not be able to promptly and accurately inform Congress and the public about how representation in the services matches that of the applicable U.S. population. In fiscal years 2000, 2002, and 2004, AC enlisted personnel had lower retention rates than officers and there were no consistent differences between the rates of racial/ethnic subgroups. While DOD prepares retention rates, it does not publish active duty retention rates which could be used by Congress in its oversight of military retention and related issues. As of May 28, 2005, 1,841 servicemembers had died and 12,658 had been wounded in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom or Enduring Freedom. Most of those who died or were wounded were Active Component Army or Marine Corps junior enlisted personnel. Among those who died, 71 percent were White, 10 percent were Hispanic, and 9 percent were African American.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-05-952, Military Personnel: Reporting Additional Servicemember Demographics Could Enhance Congressional Oversight
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-05-952
entitled 'Military Personnel: Reporting Additional Servicemember
Demographics Could Enhance Congressional Oversight' which was released
on September 23, 2005.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
September 2005:
Military Personnel:
Reporting Additional Servicemember Demographics Could Enhance
Congressional Oversight:
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-952]:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-05-952, a report to Congress Requesters:
Why GAO Did This Study:
The high pace of military operations, thousands of casualties in
ongoing military operations, and the services‘ recruiting challenges
have raised questions about who is serving in today‘s military and
concern that certain subgroups of the U.S. population may be
disproportionately represented among those fighting and dying in
support of the war on terrorism. These challenges and concerns have
increased the need for information on the demographic characteristics
of military personnel.
GAO was asked to address three questions: (1) What are the demographic
characteristics of servicemembers and how do they compare to the
comparable U.S. civilian workforce? (2) How well are the services
meeting their overall recruitment goals, and what influences whether or
not individuals join the military? (3) What are the demographic
characteristics of servicemembers who remained in the military in
fiscal years 2000, 2002, and 2004? GAO was also asked to examine the
demographic characteristics of servicemembers who died or were wounded
in combat in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.
What GAO Found:
Since the institution of the All Volunteer Force in 1973, the military
has become older and better educated, with increasing representation of
racial and ethnic minorities, females, spouses, and parents. Today‘s
force also differs from the U.S. civilian workforce in a number of
important ways. For example, the military is younger than the civilian
workforce. From a racial diversity perspective, the military, as of
December 2004, had proportionately fewer Whites, partly because the
military has proportionately more African Americans. Although Hispanic
representation in the Active Component has markedly increased from 5
percent in 1993 to 9 percent in 2004, it is below the 11 percent for
the U.S. civilian workforce. The representation of women in the
military, at 16 percent, is below that of women in the U.S. workforce,
at 48 percent, partly because of military policy and federal statutes.
Although the 1997 government-wide requirements for the collection and
reporting of information on race and ethnicity were to have been
implemented by January 1, 2003, DOD has not yet fully implemented the
requirements and its internal monthly reports continue to use some of
the former racial/ethnic categories. This situation makes it difficult
for Congress to monitor and directly compare the military and U.S.
civilian racial and ethnic compositions.
Over the past decade, the Active Component met its overall recruiting
goals more frequently than has the Reserve Component. GAO found that a
combination of personal, demographic, family, and societal factors, as
well as the availability of economic and educational incentives,
influence youths‘ decision to join or not to join the military. DOD
reports that over half of today‘s youth are not qualified to serve
because they cannot meet the military‘s entry standards for health,
education, aptitude, or other requirements. DOD has not collected
information on a recruit‘s socioeconomic status since 1999. Recent DOD
research using recruits‘ zip codes as a proxy to indicate socioeconomic
status and community population density found that the median income of
recruits‘ communities is similar to that of other youth and that the
majority of recruits come from rural and suburban areas. Without
ongoing research on recruits‘ socioeconomic status and communities, DOD
will not be able to promptly and accurately inform Congress and the
public about how representation in the services matches that of the
applicable U.S. population.
In fiscal years 2000, 2002, and 2004, AC enlisted personnel had lower
retention rates than officers and there were no consistent differences
between the rates of racial/ethnic subgroups. While DOD prepares
retention rates, it does not publish active duty retention rates which
could be used by Congress in its oversight of military retention and
related issues.
As of May 28, 2005, 1,841 servicemembers had died and 12,658 had been
wounded in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom or Enduring Freedom.
Most of those who died or were wounded were Active Component Army or
Marine Corps junior enlisted personnel. Among those who died, 71
percent were White, 10 percent were Hispanic, and 9 percent were
African American.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO recommends four actions to enhance Congress‘ ability to monitor
demographic changes in the military.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-952.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Derek B. Stewart at (202)
512-5559 or steward@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
The Charge and the Debate of the All Volunteer Force:
DOD Publications and Databases for Force Demographics:
Changing Demographics:
Demographic Characteristics of Servicemembers:
Question 1 and Summary of Approach:
Summary of Findings:
Findings:
Recruiting:
Question 2 and Summary of Approach:
Summary of Findings:
Findings:
Retention:
Question 3 and Summary of Approach:
Summary of Findings:
Findings:
Casualties:
Additional Question and Summary of Approach:
Summary of Findings:
Findings:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Analytic Issues:
Datasets Used in Analyses:
Tabulating Data on Race and Ethnicity:
DOD Used Zip Codes to Estimate Recruits' Socioeconomic Status and
Community Population Density:
Rounding Error:
Appendix III: Structure of the Reserve Component:
Appendix IV: Military Occupational Specialties That Exclude Females:
Appendix V: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Percentage of the AC that Is Female:
Table 2: Percentage of Servicemembers Serving for More than 4 Years:
Table 3: Number of Servicemembers in Each Service as of December 31,
2004:
Table 4: Number of Servicemembers in Each Pay Grade Subgroup as of
December 31, 2004:
Table 5: Percent of Servicemembers in Pay Grade Subgroups as of
December 31, 2004:
Table 6: Percent of Servicemembers in Each DOD Occupational Area as of
December 31, 2004:
Table 7: Percent of Enlisted Personnel in Each Component in DOD
Occupational Areas as of December 31, 2004:
Table 8: Percent of Officers in Each Component in DOD Occupational
Areas as of December 31, 2004:
Table 9: Percent of Servicemembers and Civilians Across Racial/Ethnic
Subgroups:
Table 10: Percent of Enlisted Personnel and Civilians with a High
School Diploma or Equivalent or Some College in the Racial/Ethnic
Subgroups:
Table 11: Percent of Officers and Civilian College Graduates in the
Racial/Ethnic Subgroups:
Table 12: Percent of AC Enlisted Personnel in Each Racial/Ethnic
Subgroup and DOD Occupational Area as of December 31, 2004:
Table 13: Percent of AC Officers in Each Racial/Ethnic Subgroup and DOD
Occupational Area as of December 31, 2004:
Table 14: Percent of RC Enlisted Personnel in Each Racial/Ethnic
Subgroup and DOD Occupational Area as of December 31, 2004:
Table 15: Percent of RC Officers in Each Racial/Ethnic Subgroup and DOD
Occupational Area as of December 31, 2004:
Table 16: Percent of Servicemembers and Civilian Workers in Each
Racial/Ethnic and Gender Subgroup:
Table 17: Distribution of Race/Ethnicity Among Female Servicemembers
and Civilians:
Table 18: Representation of AC Females across and within Enlisted
Occupational Areas as of December 31, 2004:
Table 19: Representation of AC Females across and within Officer
Occupational Areas as of December 31, 2004:
Table 20: Representation of RC Females across and within Enlisted
Occupational Areas as of December 31, 2004:
Table 21: Representation of RC Females across and within Officer
Occupational Areas as of December 31, 2004:
Table 22: Percentage of Servicemembers and Employed Civilians in
Educational Categories:
Table 23: DOD and Service-Specific Educational Standards:
Table 24: Aptitude Standards and Required and Actual Percentages of
Nonprior-service Recruits at or Above the 50TH Percentile in Fiscal
Year 2004:
Table 25: Percent of Nonprior-service Accessions Scoring in AFQT
Categories I-IIIA during Selected Years:
Table 26: Examples of DOD Medical Standards which May Have Disqualified
Potential Recruits in Fiscal Year 2004:
Table 27: DOD and Service-Specific Moral Character Standards for
Nonprior-service Recruits in Fiscal Year 2004:
Table 28: Percent of AC Servicemembers in Each Racial/Ethnic Subgroup
Who Have 1 Year or Less of Service in Fiscal Years 2000, 2002, and
2004:
Table 29: Percent of Enlisted AC Accessions between 1999 and 2004 and
Comparable Civilian Youth Aged 17-21 from Community Population Density
Subgroups:
Table 30: Percent of Enlisted AC Accessions and Comparable Civilian
Youth Aged 17-21 from Geographic Regions:
Table 31: Examples of the Reserve Components' Economic Enlistment
Incentives Being Offered in February 2005:
Table 32: Examples of Reserve Component Educational Enlistment
Incentives Being Offered in February 2005:
Table 33: AC Enlisted Retention in Fiscal Years 2000-2005:
Table 34: AC Continuation Rates for Each Service in Fiscal Years 2000,
2002, and 2004:
Table 35: AC Continuation Rates for Race and Gender Subgroups in Fiscal
Years 2000, 2002, and 2004:
Table 36: AC Enlisted Continuation Rates for DOD Occupational Codes in
Fiscal Years 2000, 2002, and 2004:
Table 37: AC Officer Continuation Rates for DOD Occupational Codes in
Fiscal Years 2000, 2002, and 2004:
Table 38: Continuation Rates for RC Servicemembers in Fiscal Years
2000, 2002, and the Fourth Quarter of Fiscal Year 2004:
Table 39: Continuation Rates for RC Servicemembers by Years of Service
in Fiscal Years 2002 and the Fourth Quarter of Fiscal Year 2004:
Table 40: Number and Percent of Servicemembers in Racial/Ethnic
Subgroups Who Died in Selected Military Operations as of May 28, 2005:
Table 41: Operation and Circumstance of Death of the 1,841
Servicemembers Who Died in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring
Freedom as of May 28, 2005:
Table 42: Representation of Selected Demographic Subgroups Among the
1,841 Servicemembers Who Died in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring
Freedom as of May 28, 2005:
Table 43: Community Population Density and Estimated Socioeconomic
Status of the 482 Reservists Who Died in Operations Iraqi Freedom and
Enduring Freedom as of May 28, 2005:
Table 44: Operation for the 12,658 Servicemembers Who Were Wounded in
Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom as of May 28, 2005:
Table 45: Representation of Selected Demographic Subgroups Among the
12,658 Servicemembers Who Were Wounded in Operations Iraqi Freedom and
Enduring Freedom as of May 28, 2005:
Table 46: Community Population Density and Estimated Socioeconomic
Status of the 3,197 Reservists Who Were Wounded in Operations Iraqi
Freedom and Enduring Freedom as of May 28, 2005:
Table 47: Military Occupational Specialties That Exclude Females as of
March 1997:
Figures:
Figure 1: Military Racial and Ethnic Representation:
Figure 2: Percent of Males and Females in Each Component and among
Employed Civilians:
Figure 3: Percentage of the AC, RC, and U.S. Population in Age
Categories:
Figure 4: Percent of Servicemembers and Civilians in Three Citizenship
Subgroups in 2004:
Figure 5: AC and RC Achievement of Enlisted Recruiting Goals for Fiscal
Years 1995 through 2004:
Figure 6: DOD Components' Achievement of Enlisted Recruiting Goals for
October 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005:
Figure 7: Four General Types of Factors that Influence Youths'
Decisions About Joining:
Figure 8: Economic and Educational Incentives:
Abbreviations:
AC: Active Component:
AFQT: Armed Forces Qualifying Test:
AVF: All Volunteer Force:
CPS: Current Population Survey:
DOD: Department of Defense:
DMDC: Defense Manpower Data Center:
RC: Reserve Component:
Letter September 22, 2005:
The Honorable Ike Skelton:
Ranking Minority Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Charles Rangel:
House of Representatives:
Since the advent of the All Volunteer Force (AVF) in 1973, the active
duty force has undergone several demographic changes. Our previous
examination of the demographic composition of the AVF showed that
between 1974 and 2000, the force became older and better educated. The
AVF also experienced increases in the proportions of servicemembers who
were racial/ethnic minorities, females, married, or parents.[Footnote
1]
A number of significant events have occurred within the last 4 years,
namely, the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the ensuing
Operations Enduring Freedom, Noble Eagle, and Iraqi Freedom. These
military commitments increased the pace of operations for U.S. forces,
particularly in the Army and Marine Corps. To ensure that the military
has sufficient personnel to meet U.S. global commitments, Congress in
October 2004 authorized increases in personnel for the Army and Marine
Corps.[Footnote 2]
Ensuring the availability of sufficient numbers of trained, high-
quality personnel in an environment of increased deployment and armed
conflict has proven to be one of the greatest personnel challenges
faced by the U.S. military since the inception of the AVF. The active
Army, the Army Reserve, and the Army National Guard, for example,
missed their early fiscal year 2005 recruiting goals. We are currently
looking at the military services' efforts to enhance recruitment and
retention of enlisted personnel.
The high pace of military operations, thousands of casualties in
ongoing military operations, and the services' recruiting challenges
have raised questions about who is serving in today's military and
concern that certain subgroups of the U.S. population are
disproportionately represented among those fighting and dying in
support of the war on terrorism. These challenges and concerns have
increased the need for information about the demographic
characteristics of military personnel.
As agreed with your offices, this report addressed three questions: (1)
What are the demographic characteristics of servicemembers, and how do
they compare to those of similarly aged and educated civilians in the
U.S. workforce? (2) How well are the services meeting their recruitment
goals, and what influences whether or not individuals join the
military? (3) What are the demographic characteristics of
servicemembers who remained in the military in fiscal years 2000, 2002,
and 2004? You also asked us to examine the demographic characteristics
of servicemembers who died or were wounded in combat in Iraq or
Afghanistan in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom or Enduring Freedom.
To address these objectives, we examined Department of Defense (DOD)
policies, regulations, and instructions and reviewed laws relating to
the staffing of the military. We also reviewed governmentwide guidance
on demographic analyses, such as the recent change in the way that
information about racial/ethnic groups is to be gathered and displayed,
as well as reports on servicemembers' demographics, recruitment,
retention, and casualties issued by GAO, DOD, the services, and
individuals from other organizations such as RAND, the Center for Naval
Analysis, and the University of Maryland's Center for Research on
Military Organization. Additionally, we interviewed policy officials
from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and military researchers from DOD, the services, and other
organizations to obtain insights into the factors that influence
enlistment decisions, attitudes and opinions of today's youth,
recruiting challenges, characteristics of recruits, and demographic
trends. We also requested that the Defense Manpower Data Center provide
databases containing demographic data on active and reserve component
servicemembers. We determined that the data were sufficiently reliable
for our purposes and analyzed the data to identify the demographic
characteristics of servicemembers. We conducted our work between August
2004 and July 2005 in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards. Additional information on our scope, methodology,
and analytic procedures are presented in appendixes I and II.
Results in Brief:
According to DOD data, the demographic composition of the military is
somewhat different than that of the similarly aged and educated segment
of the civilian workforce.[Footnote 3] When compared to comparable
civilian workers, the military had proportionately fewer Whites (67
percent in the military compared to 71 percent in the civilian
workforce), partly because the military has proportionately more
African Americans (17 percent in the military versus 11 percent in the
civilian workforce). The representation of American Indian/Alaskan
Natives in the military equals that of the civilian workforce (about 1
percent in each). Although Hispanic representation in the military has
markedly increased over the last decade to 9 percent, 11 percent of the
comparable civilian workforce is of Hispanic ethnicity. Similarly,
while Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders are 3 percent of the military,
they comprise 5 percent of the civilian workforce. The representation
of women in the military, at 16 percent, is partly impacted by military
policy and federal statutes denying women access to military
specialties involving ground combat. The distribution of racial/ethnic
subgroups among female servicemembers differed from that of female
civilian workers. For example, African Americans' representation among
female servicemembers at 28 percent was higher than their 13 percent
representation among civilian female workers, but Whites'
representation among female servicemembers at 54 percent was below
their 71 percent representation among civilian female workers. Two
percent of servicemembers are not U.S. citizens. The top three foreign
countries of origin identified by servicemembers who are not U.S.
citizens or nationals are the Philippines, Mexico, and Jamaica. Also,
DOD has not fully implemented the government-wide requirements on the
collection and reporting of racial and ethnic data that were to have
been implemented by January 1, 2003. The services continue to convert
their data on current servicemembers' race and ethnicity and DOD's
internal monthly reports of servicemember race and ethnicity continue
to use the previous racial and ethnicity categories.[Footnote 4] This
results in racial and ethnic tabulations that cannot be clearly
compared to tabulations of the U.S. population as reported by other
federal agencies such as the Bureau of the Census, making it difficult
for Congress to compare the military and civilian racial and ethnic
compositions. The continued use of the former categories and methods
may result in the undercounting of Hispanic servicemembers who belong
to a minority racial subgroup.
Over the past decade the Active Component[Footnote 5] (AC) has met its
overall recruiting goals more frequently than has the Reserve Component
(RC). We found that a combination of personal, demographic, family, and
societal factors influence whether or not individuals join the
military. According to DOD researchers, at least half of today's youth
between the ages of 16 and 21 are not qualified to serve in the
military because they fail to meet the military's entry standards for
education, aptitude, health, moral character, or other requirements.
Between fiscal years 2000 and 2004, the AC annually accessed between
approximately 176,400 to 183,000 nonprior-service enlisted personnel
and about 17,500 to 21,500 officers. However, since fiscal year 2002,
the proportion of recruits who are African Americans has declined in
the AC. DOD has not routinely surveyed and reported on the
socioeconomic status of its servicemembers since 1999 and has not
previously routinely reported on the types of communities from which
recruits are drawn. A recent DOD analysis of over 1 million recruits
found that recruits came from communities representing all
socioeconomic levels and, at $44,500, the median income of recruits'
communities roughly equaled the $44,300 median income of the
communities of civilian youths. Proportionately more recruits came from
the South and West than from the Northeast. Additionally,
proportionately more enlisted recruits (45 percent-52 percent) than
similarly aged civilian youth (40 percent) came from a rural community.
Weaknesses with DOD's measures of recruits' socioeconomic status and
community population density limit the information provided to Congress
to perform its oversight role. To support recruiting, DOD spent over
$455 million in fiscal year 2003 for enlistment bonuses, college funds,
and loan repayments that were designed, in part, to help the services
maintain the required numbers of personnel in critical occupational
specialties. Some incentives have increased. While economic and
educational incentives are cited as important factors youth consider in
their decisions to join or not join the military, DOD data also shows
that the attractiveness of joining the military after high school has
declined because of operations in Iraq.
In fiscal years 2000, 2002, and 2004, DOD reported that 85 to 87
percent of all AC enlisted personnel and 90 to 93 percent of AC
officers remained in the military. In the RC, 83 to 85 percent of
enlisted personnel and 88 to 89 percent of officers remained in the
military. In general, active or reserve Air Force continuation rates
tended to be higher than rates for the other components. In the AC,
there were no consistent differences between the continuation rates of
racial/ethnic subgroups and the rates for females were within 2
percentage points of the rates for males in each year examined. While
DOD routinely prepares some of these types of retention analyses for
use within the department, it does not provide active duty retention
rates in reports such as Population Representation in the Military
Services, which could be used by Congress in its oversight of military
retention and related issues.
As of May 28, 2005, 1,841 servicemembers had died and 12,658 had been
wounded in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. Of the 1,841
servicemembers who died, 482 were reservists. Of the 12,658
servicemembers who were wounded, 3,197 were reservists. Most of those
who died or were wounded were junior enlisted personnel in the active
Army or Marine Corps. Seventy-two percent of those who died were either
killed in combat or died later of wounds received while in combat.
White servicemembers constituted 71 percent of the deaths although they
represented 67 percent of the AC and Selected Reserve[Footnote 6] we
examined. In contrast, African Americans accounted for 9 percent of the
deaths in these operations although they comprised 17 percent of the AC
and Selected Reserve force we studied. Hispanic servicemembers
comprised 10 percent of the deaths compared to the 9 percent of the AC
and Selected Reserve force we examined. The majority of selected
reservists who were killed or wounded during these operations were from
communities that DOD classified as being of medium socioeconomic
status.
To improve the ability of the public, DOD, and Congress to identify and
monitor demographic changes in the race, ethnicity, socioeconomic
status, and community population density of servicemembers in the AVF
and to enhance Congress's ability to perform its oversight functions,
we are recommending that DOD (1) gather and report data on race and
ethnicity that are consistent with the required procedures set forth by
the Office of Management and Budget, (2) conduct research to determine
a feasible process for assessing the socioeconomic status of recruits
and periodically include these findings in annual reports on
servicemembers, (3) assess the type of communities recruits come from
and periodically include a measure of population density in the annual
demographic reports, and (4) include continuation rates on AC and RC
personnel in DOD's annual demographic reports. In commenting on a draft
of this report, DOD concurred with our four recommendations.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Defense, the
Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; the Commandant of the Marine Corps;
and the Chiefs of the National Guard Bureau, the Army Reserve, the Army
National Guard, the Air Force Reserve, the Air National Guard, the Navy
Reserve, and the Marine Corps Reserve. We will also make copies
available to others upon request. The report will be available at no
charge on GAO's Web site at [Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staffs have any questions concerning this report, please
contact me at (202) 512-5559 or [Hyperlink, stewartd@gao.gov]. Contact
points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs
may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major
contributions to this report are listed in appendix VI.
Signed by:
Derek B. Stewart:
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:
[End of section]
Background:
The Charge and the Debate of the All Volunteer Force:
In 1970, President Nixon directed the Commission on an All Volunteer
Armed Force-the Gates Commission--to develop a plan to eliminate
conscription and institute an All Volunteer Force (AVF). The commission
unanimously recommended the elimination of conscription, while noting
that, except during major wars and the latter half of the 20TH century,
the United States has historically relied on volunteers for its
military forces. Prior to the adoption of the AVF, there were a number
of arguments made for and against an AVF. Some of these arguments,
offered by members of the commission, Congress, military leaders, and
the public, follow:
* Arguments against an AVF:
* Opinion that military service is an obligation of citizenship.
* Concern that the military would attract an insufficient number of
recruits, especially during times of war.
* Concern that because of relatively poorer civilian opportunities,
African Americans would be attracted to the higher pay of a voluntary
force and therefore would be overrepresented in the force.
* Fear that a volunteer military would not attract a cross section of
high-quality American youth, causing a decline in military
effectiveness.
* The AVF is costly because of higher costs for benefits and increased
pay.
* Arguments for an AVF:
* Concern that conscription is inequitable, divisive, and inefficient.
* Availability of more potential recruits in the late 1960s because the
"baby boom" generation provided more young men eligible for military
service.
* Concern that minorities, especially African Americans, represented a
disproportionate share of Vietnam War fatalities.
* The higher cost of an AVF transfers the burden of military service
from draftees to the population as a whole. The higher cost also is
partly offset by lower turnover and fewer people in a training status.
* Conscription is costly because of the higher costs of recruiting,
training, and turnover.
Despite opposition from many in the military, Congress, and the
administration, the AVF was adopted on July 1,1973, marking the end of
conscription.
DOD Publications and Databases for Force Demographics:
The Office of the Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness publishes
the demographic characteristics of military personnel in several
official documents.
* For 30 years, the Office of Accession Policy has produced the
Population Representation in the Military Services,[Footnote 7] which
contains:
* demographic characteristics such as age, gender, race, and ethnicity,
of current active duty personnel and selected reservists (including the
Coast Guard);
* military characteristics of current active duty and selected
reservists such as pay grade, DOD occupational area, and years of
service;
* information on applicants and accessions; and:
* trends.
* Similarly, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Reserve Affairs annually publishes the Official Guard and Reserve
Manpower Strengths and Statistics which includes data on Selected
Reservists as well as reservists in the Individual Ready Reserve,
Inactive National Guard, and Retired Reserves (see app. III for more
information on reserve personnel categories). The report includes:
* tabulations on current reservists' demographic and military
characteristics such as gender, race, ethnicity, pay grade, and
occupational category; and:
* data on end strength, accessions, attrition, and retention.
* Data sources--Data for both reports are drawn from databases
maintained by the DMDC. (See app. II for more detailed information on
the data sources used in this report.)
* The active duty master and loss files are the sources of information
for active duty personnel.
* The Reserve Components Common Personnel Data System is the source of
information for reserve component personnel.
Changing Demographics:
The AC of the AVF has been characterized by increased:
* Representation of African Americans and Hispanics.
* At the initiation of the AVF in 1973, African Americans and Hispanics
comprised 12 percent and 1 percent, respectively, of the AC.
* A decade later in 1983, African American and Hispanic representation
had increased to 19 percent and 4 percent, respectively.
* By 1993, African Americans and Hispanics comprised 19 percent and 5
percent, respectively, of the AC.
* By December 2004, AC African American representation had decreased 1
percentage point to 18 percent, while Hispanic representation rose 4
percentage points to 9 percent.
* Representation of women (see table 1).
Table 1: Percentage of the AC that Is Female:
Pre-AVF;
Year: 1964;
Percentage female: 1%.
AVF initiation;
Year: 1973;
Percentage female: 2%.
Post-AVF;
Year: 1983;
Percentage female: 9%.
Year: 1993;
Percentage female: 12%.
Year: 2003;
Percentage female: 15%.
Sources: Percentages are GAO calculations using data from DOD's
Selected Manpower Statistics: Fiscal Year 2003, pp. 44-45, 71-73.
[End of table]
* Retention (see table 2).
Table 2: Percentage of Servicemembers Serving for More than 4 Years:
Pre-AVF;
Year: 1969;
Percentage of each service: Army: 18%;
Percentage of each service: Navy: 31%;
Percentage of each service: Marine Corps: 16%;
Percentage of each service: Air Force: 46%.
Post-AVF;
Year: 2002;
Percentage of each service: Army: 51%;
Percentage of each service: Navy: 49%;
Percentage of each service: Marine Corps: 35%;
Percentage of each service: Air Force: 66%.
Source: Bernard D. Rostker, "The Gates Commission: Right for the Wrong
Reasons," from The All Volunteer Force: Thirty Years of Service,
Brassey's Inc. (Washington, D.C. 2004), p. 29.
Note: Rows may not total 100 percent because of rounding.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Demographic Characteristics of Servicemembers:
Question 1 and Summary of Approach:
What are the demographic characteristics of servicemembers and how do
they compare to those of similarly aged and educated civilians in the
U.S. workforce?
We compared the characteristics of over 2.2 million servicemembers in
the AC and RC to a nationally representative sample of civilian
workers. We examined almost 1.4 million AC servicemembers who were on
active duty on December, 31, 2004. We also examined almost 835,000 RC
Selected Reservists in the Army Reserve, Army National Guard, Navy
Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, Air Force Reserve, and Air National
Guard. We compared servicemembers' characteristics to those of employed
civilians in the United States, aged 18-49, with at least a high school
diploma or equivalent.
Summary of Findings:
1A. Military force overview:
AC servicemembers comprise 63 percent of all servicemembers examined.
The components vary both in the extent to which junior personnel
comprise the enlisted corps and in their occupational make-up.
1B. Race and ethnicity:
* There are proportionately more African American and proportionately
fewer White servicemembers in the military than in the comparable
civilian workforce.
* The proportions of both Hispanics and Asian Americans/Pacific
Islanders in the military are slightly lower than in the comparable
civilian workforce.
* The proportion of American Indians/Alaskan Natives in the military is
about the same as that in the comparable civilian workforce.
1C. Gender:
About 16 percent of the armed forces are female, with representation
being highest in the Air Force and lowest in the Marine Corps.
1D. Age:
We compared the age of servicemembers to that of the entire U.S.
population and found that, in general, servicemembers are younger than
persons in the U.S. population.
1E. Education:
We compared the education levels of servicemembers to those of the
entire U.S. population and found that proportionately fewer
servicemembers have attended college than in the U.S. population.
1F. Citizenship and country of origin:
Two percent of all servicemembers are not U.S. citizens. Among the
countries of birth most frequently cited by noncitizens are the
Philippines, Mexico, and Jamaica.
Findings:
1A. Military Force Overview--Force Strength:
Table 3: Number of Servicemembers in Each Service as of December 31,
2004:
Service: Army;
Active: 488,143;
Selected Reserve: Reserve: 198,947;
Selected Reserve: National Guard[A]: 335,490;
Total: 1,022,580.
Service: Navy;
Active: 365,419;
Selected Reserve: Reserve: 79,467;
Selected Reserve: National Guard[A]: 0;
Total: 444,886.
Service: Air Force;
Active: 365,567;
Selected Reserve: Reserve: 74,875;
Selected Reserve: National Guard[A]: 105,805;
Total: 546,247.
Service: Marine Corps;
Active: 177,110;
Selected Reserve: Reserve: 40,049;
Selected Reserve: National Guard[A]: 0;
Total: 217,159.
Service: Total;
Active: 1,396,239;
Selected Reserve: Reserve: 393,338;
Selected Reserve: National Guard[A]: 441,295;
Total: 2,230,872.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD-provided data.
[A] National Guard servicemembers, with their unique federal and state
roles, perform under the command of the President for federal missions
such as warfighting and under the command of the state governor for
state missions such as responding to natural disasters.
[End of table]
* Over 2.2 million servicemembers from the AC and RC Selected Reserve
were in the military on December 31, 2004 (see table 3).
* AC servicemembers comprised 63 percent (1,396,239) of the
servicemembers we reviewed.
* There were 834,633 RC Selected Reservists serving as Individual
Mobilization Augmentees, drilling reservists, or in unit support or
training.[Footnote 8]
* The Army is the largest service and the only one with less than half
of its personnel in the AC.
Table 4: Number of Servicemembers in Each Pay Grade Subgroup as of
December 31, 2004:
Component: Total AC;
Junior enlisted: (E1-E4): 609,075;
Senior enlisted: (E5- E9): 560,794;
Warrant officers: (WO1-WO5): 15,586;
Junior officers: (O1-O3): 126,020;
Senior officers: (O4-O6): 83,867;
General/Flag officers: (O7-O10): 881;
Subtotals: Total enlisted: 1,169,884;
Subtotals: Total officers: 226,355;
Total: 1,396,239.
Component: Total RC;
Junior enlisted: (E1-E4): 329,429;
Senior enlisted: (E5- E9): 380,306;
Warrant officers: (WO1-WO5): 9,821;
Junior officers: (O1-O3): 46,373;
Senior officers: (O4-O6): 68,098;
General/Flag officers: (O7-O10): 597;
Subtotals: Total enlisted: 709,742;
Subtotals: Total officers: 124,891;
Total: 834,633.
Total;
Junior enlisted: (E1-E4): 938,504;
Senior enlisted: (E5-E9): 941,100;
Warrant officers: (WO1-WO5): 25,407;
Junior officers: (O1- O3): 172,393;
Senior officers: (O4-O6): 151,965;
General/Flag officers: (O7-O10): 1,478;
Subtotals: Total enlisted: 1,879,626;
Subtotals: Total officers: 351,246;
Total: 2,230,872.
[End of table]
Source: GAO analysis of DOD-provided data.
Notes: AC enlisted subtotal includes 15 AC enlisted personnel with
unknown pay grades. AC officer subtotal includes 1 AC officer with
unknown pay grade. RC enlisted subtotal includes 7 RC enlisted
personnel with unknown pay grades. RC officer subtotal includes 2 RC
officers with unknown pay grades.
* Of the 2.2 million servicemembers, almost 1.9 million or 84 percent
were enlisted personnel (see table 4).
* In the AC enlisted and officer corps, there are more junior than
senior personnel, although the opposite pattern is noted in the RC. The
higher proportion of senior personnel in the RC enlisted and officer
corps may reflect the fact that many RC accessions have prior military
service and therefore entered the RC at a pay grade above the lowest
(entry-level) pay grade.
1A. Military Force Overview--Pay Grade:
Table 5: Percent of Servicemembers in Pay Grade Subgroups as of
December 31, 2004:
Component: Army;
Pay grade subgroup: Junior enlisted (E1-E4): 46%;
Pay grade subgroup: Senior enlisted (E5-E9): 38%;
Pay grade subgroup: Warrant officers: (WO1-WO5): 2%;
Pay grade subgroup: Junior officers: (O1-O3): 8%;
Pay grade subgroup: Senior officers (O4-O6): 6%;
Pay grade subgroup: General/flag officers: (O7-O10):
